MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099746232

Corporate Environmental Responsibility: A Study of Single-Use Plastics in Canada

2019· article· en· W3099746232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelsey Morden

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessCorporate social responsibilityPublic relationsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, millions of people are beginning to acknowledge that a wide-scale environmental crisis is occurring with the deforestation of rainforests, severe weather events, marine plastic pollution, and rising global temperatures and ocean levels. This is prompting many to look at the unsustainable practices of large transnational corporations with their extensive supply chains, high emission rates and excessive packaging. In light of public concern, many of these corporations are making voluntary commitments to become more sustainable as a form of corporate environmental responsibility (CER). This paper explores the motivating factors behind CER through the case study of single-use plastics in Canada to understand whether policies and products are genuine in supporting the environment or a form of greenwashing to deflect government regulations, gain legitimacy in the eyes of the public and increase market share. For the purposes of this research, greenwashing is defined as “the phenomena of socially and environmentally destructive corporations attempting to preserve and expand their markets or power by posing as friends of the environment” (CorpWatch, 2001). Literature reviews are used to provide a brief summary of the history of environmental policy in Canada as well as the history and benefits of single-use plastics, the environmental, human health and economic impacts of plastic pollution, and recent changes in public perceptions. With this background knowledge, case studies of corporate commitments are analyzed to highlight differences between CER and greenwashing and how to discern between the two. In order to provide more insight into the Canadian context, stakeholder interviews were conducted with industry, consulting firms and environmental NGOs. Interviews explored sentiments around single-use plastics, potential motives behind voluntary corporate plastic commitments and areas for improvement in terms of government regulations and corporate practices. This paper concludes with recommendations for corporations and governments on how to more effectively manage CER and plastic pollution, while improving waste management systems in Canada. Areas of focus include extended producer responsibility, material procurement, standardized labelling and content guidelines, and the facilitation of collaboration and innovation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0400.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.142 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYorkSpace (York University)Same topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207